Anyone using Convergent Design's Nano Flash?

? There's no way that an MPEG-2 chipset is going to record AVC-anything. The Nano is built on Sony's MPEG-2 chips, so you can get intraframe MPEG-2, but not h.264 in any flavor.
 
Sorry neophyte techie here. Do you guys think using a letus elite on an Ex1 plus the Convergent's nano flash would produce a better image than a letus elite with no nano flash? I guess I'm wondering how much the image would be downgraded considering it records from letus' screen? Thanks!!!
 
One thing I remember is that to get a good quality (low compression artefacts) of a VHS tape you need to use quite a high bit rate. This is because of all the random noise in the image which complicates the image making it more difficult to compress even though it is really lower resolution etc

If the Letus introduces addition image elements due to the rotating round glass then it may actually stress the EX's codec more by its very nature, in which case the nano would definetly be able to help....

This is only a general comment, I don't own a letus nor have I ever used one.
 
Jim Arthurs said:
I thought I'd take one more shot at this slow pan issue... I'm absolutely sure now it's NOT a codec issue, or a CMOS issue. What I believe it is, is a combination of motion blur, monitor refresh and sharpness settings used on the recording.

Here's a test I did today on a busy image, with a slow pan.

http://ftp.datausa.com/imageshoppe/outgoing/EX1/EX1_slow_pan_sharpness_test.mov

(please download first... it's a 24meg photoJPG to keep compression artifacts out of the equation.)

I set the shutter to 1/2000th to remove any trace of motion blur from the equation. I motion stabilized in After Effects a sharpness target to preserve it in frame at 1:1 size. Stabilizing it to one location on the screen removes any motion issues from your display device. In addition, I shot it sharpness turned "off".

As you can see, it does not change sharpness throughout the run of the shot in any way.

BTW, one side of the sharpness target is 35Mb original codec, the other is split-screened with 100Mb. There's no sharpness difference in this case between the codec bit rates. With faster motion and bigger vectors you will see an advantage with the Nano, and overall issues of compression and color sharpness are improved, obviously.

I can't do better than this, and if anyone can, please do. In my book, the issue is closed.

I believe if edge sharpness is turned on the "pop" effect is exaggerated. I believe motion blur is 50% of the issue, and monitor update/response time is the other major component. It's not the chip, or the codec at any reasonable bit rate.

Regards,
Click to expand...
Jim, I checked the file you posted, and I see exactly the opposite: It's extremely obvious to me that there is a serious change from the beginning of the shot(when it is still) and when it starts moving (it´s a shame you didn't let it still for a couple of seconds to compare better, but still you can see it). The blur is specially blatant in the small section of the resolution chart, or near the center of the big one, and even in the text. And it feels exactly as the one thing I don't like when I slowly pan on my EX1. If I understand well, the motion stabilized area is a split screen between the 35Mb/s and 100Mb/s???... if this is right, then I think these are really bad news, I mean: if it was a codec issue, I would jump to buy a Nano Flash tomorrow, as it would really renew my love for my EX1, which has been lately very eroded by the slow pan issue...
 
Last edited:
I watched the clip a few times and it is tough to tell that much as it is on a computer screen and small.

Have you put the results on a blu-ray and watched it on a 1080p television?

This may have been mentioned in this thread as I have not read it all, but I think the EX-1 has an enhancement filter that just can not keep up with the frames as they go by. This has been discussed and by turning detail off or down this effect is lessened.

But I think this effect is also a product of producing so much detail. It is part of HD images. They are so crisp compared to SD that any movement disrupts the apple cart.

When I watch major motion picture releases in a theatre, the pan shots always look poor, jittery and blurry. They certainly have a lot of detail but fall down when the camera pans. Some of this is framerate and shutter, but not all of it.
 
Jim Arthurs said:
I thought I'd take one more shot at this slow pan issue... I'm absolutely sure now it's NOT a codec issue, or a CMOS issue. What I believe it is, is a combination of motion blur, monitor refresh and sharpness settings used on the recording.

Here's a test I did today on a busy image, with a slow pan.

http://ftp.datausa.com/imageshoppe/outgoing/EX1/EX1_slow_pan_sharpness_test.mov

(please download first... it's a 24meg photoJPG to keep compression artifacts out of the equation.)

I set the shutter to 1/2000th to remove any trace of motion blur from the equation. I motion stabilized in After Effects a sharpness target to preserve it in frame at 1:1 size. Stabilizing it to one location on the screen removes any motion issues from your display device. In addition, I shot it sharpness turned "off".

As you can see, it does not change sharpness throughout the run of the shot in any way.

BTW, one side of the sharpness target is 35Mb original codec, the other is split-screened with 100Mb. There's no sharpness difference in this case between the codec bit rates. With faster motion and bigger vectors you will see an advantage with the Nano, and overall issues of compression and color sharpness are improved, obviously.

I can't do better than this, and if anyone can, please do. In my book, the issue is closed.

I believe if edge sharpness is turned on the "pop" effect is exaggerated. I believe motion blur is 50% of the issue, and monitor update/response time is the other major component. It's not the chip, or the codec at any reasonable bit rate.

Regards,
Click to expand...

Wow, I think this video finally debunks the EX1 sharpness/motion myth. If you pause it the grass and chart is just as tack sharp as when the camera comes to rest.

This video coupled with my own observations leads me to believe it wasn't a camera issue after all. My projection HDTV (which I believe is interlaced) looks much better with EX1 motion than my new LCD 60Hz Sony TV. I am shooting 95% of my footage in 1080/60i HQ mode.

Now the colors on the Sony TV are much better but any panning results in noticeable blur. I used to think it was a camera issue until this video...now I know/postulate that it's related directly to a monitor's ability to handle motion. Come to think of it any 60i material on the Sony TV has this effect but I think because it was my own footage I was looking at I noticed it a lot more.

While I'm at it the best thing I did for my TV was turn noise reduction OFF. If anyone thinks the EX1 at +12dB of gain boost looks soft, this may be a big factor in why (TV noise reduction = softening of the picture). I'd rather look at sharp, grainy footage than soft, still slightly grainy footage.

So I bet if I had a 120Hz or 240Hz LEDTV or something EX1 footage would look stunningly sharp/glass smooth! This is great to know.
 
I looked extensively at the footage posted. The sharpness on the resolution / focus chart does NOT change. Regardless of the camera being in full movement or coming to a halt at the end, it stays sharp.

However, the very first frame looks weird: It's sharper, but with clearly more compression artifacts. It doesn't appear to have more resolution though, more like a sharpening filter has been applied to the very first frame.

p.s I loaded the clip in Vegas Video for frame by frame analyzing.
 
hi!
I'm a little confused... can I ask u something?
Well,

1) Which is the easier way to record with the nanoflash and EX1/R? I can simply push rec on my camera? or I need an sxs card in the slot of camera in order to shoot?

2) Which is the best configuration for mount nanoflash o EX1? I have to find the best solution to put on the camera the nanoflash, the receiver for wireless microfone, the light ...and stay comfortable in the shooting time!
Please explain me what I have to buy:adaptors, cable,special batteries!

Well, thank u very much!
bye
Charles
 
imax said:
hi!
I'm a little confused... can I ask u something?
Well,

1) Which is the easier way to record with the nanoflash and EX1/R? I can simply push rec on my camera? or I need an sxs card in the slot of camera in order to shoot?

2) Which is the best configuration for mount nanoflash o EX1? I have to find the best solution to put on the camera the nanoflash, the receiver for wireless microfone, the light ...and stay comfortable in the shooting time!
Please explain me what I have to buy:adaptors, cable,special batteries!

Well, thank u very much!
bye
Charles
Click to expand...

With regard to the first question - I have found it easiest to set the Nano to trigger on the timecode of the camera - just push the camera record and both the camera and Nano record. I would always have media in the camera (SxS or SDHC) as a backup.

This guy has everything you will need for mounting the Nanoflash - I am using his setup and am very pleased - he can also handle cables etc. He is very easy to work with and will do custom stuff if you have certain requirements.
http://www.westsideav.com/EX1plate/
 
Questions about the NanoFlash:

1. Does anyone know if the Nanoflash has 10bit color?

2. A friend wonders if it comes with a CODEC for Adobe Premiere CS3.
 
stephenmick said:
1. NanoFlash records 8-bit.
2. It records .MXF and .MOV files (your choice).
Click to expand...


Thanks. Does the codec stand up to heavier grading? I thought the increased bit-stream of 50, 100, or 200 would help, but I don't know how much difference staying at 8 bit will make from going to 10 bit.
 
Yes, the codec does stand up well to heavier grading. The increased bit-rate really delivers more detail in situations where lower bit-rate codecs would break down.

The codec (XDCAM 422) is also much more edit-friendly, with files straight out of the NanoFlash being able to be dropped into FCP. I've never worked with the .MXF files, but I assume they're equally easy to work with.
 
Old thread, but I was curious - did you ever get your nano flash modified to handle 10 bit? I'd love to get info on the conversion, or a contact to get it done.
Thanks!
 
After working with 14-bit RAW images from my wife's Nikon D7000, I realize that any upgrade from 8-bit means a fairly dramatic improvement in stretchability in the shadows. I think 10-bit XDCam would be terrific and would alleviate the last obstacle to getting that perfect Blu-ray picture.
 
Chad, check out sound devices new entry. I know you're a sound guy, and this thing is already hot. It will record to either prores or DNXHD (full 10-bit of course), has the same xlr preamps and circuitry as their 7 series equipment (!!) realtime conversion from the sdi input to the hdmi output and viceversa, a very nice screen, aes input, etc

street price is 2595

http://www.sounddevices.com/products/pix.htm

(edit: just realized it wasn't chad that bumped this, LOL)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top